Home owners and developers could be forced to consult neighbours on plans before lodging them with a council, under landmark reforms that NSW Planning Minister Rob Stokes hopes will "remove the element of surprise" from the system.
The proposal is one of a number of changes being considered by Mr Stokes as he prepares to revisit the government's ambitious but failed bid in 2013 to overhaul the state's planning act for the first time in more than 30 years.
After months of consultation, reforms under then planning minister Brad Hazzard were blocked by Labor in the upper house amid community opposition to key elements.
Mr Stokes told Fairfax Media the government had learnt from the experience and had jettisoned contentious reforms like "code assessment", which fast-tracked complying development with limited community objection rights.
The contentious proposal to replace "ecologically sustainable development" with "sustainable development" has been dumped, as has the idea of reducing the number of land-use zones and axing state environmental planning policies.
However, a central theme of the 2013 reforms – that the community reaches broad agreement on what types of developments can occur and where in their area to streamline assessment of applications – is likely to remain.
"We want to remove the element of surprise from planning," Mr Stokes said. "That's when people get upset. When something happens that they weren't expecting.
"The approach taken in 2013 was quite revolutionary. It was, 'let's throw out the planning system and rewrite it. I think it was very well-intentioned, but I've had the opportunity to look at that and reflect on it.
"What I've learned through that is, it's far better to be evolutionary and pragmatic."
Mr Stokes conceded that planning for Sydney's growth is not easy.
But while Sydney's annual growth of around 1 per cent is "very, very high", he noted some African cities have 6 per cent growth, a lack of water and "tonnes of garbage in the streets".
"I do think we need to have a broader perspective on the challenges we face," he said.
"They're big challenges. But in the global context, we're actually very fortunate and we need to remember that."
The idea for pre-DA consultation with neighbours is designed to fix the current system whereby neighbours are only informed after an application is received by a council and they then lodge objections.
Mr Stokes said this "provokes hostility" and is costly to ratepayers.
"Wouldn't it be a better system if we tried to work out as much of this before we got the council involved?" he said.
"So pre-DA, where the system encourages you to come to me and say, 'This is what I propose to do. What reasonable problems have you got with it?"
Details of consultation – whether a discussion or presentation of final plans in the mail to affected neighbours – would need to be in the application to council.
Mr Stokes is also considering an opt-in system, with the incentive that assessment would be faster.
"The key to this is trying, as far as possible, to remove the idea that people will be surprised by the things that are happening next door to them," he said.
Mr Stokes is also considering making it mandatory for councils to use independent hearing and assessment panels for deciding developments.
They would also be given responsibility for a broader range of applications.
The $20 million threshold at which the new Sydney Planning Panels become responsible for deciding an application ($5 million for a council project) is likely to be lifted to an as-yet-undecided amount.
Mr Stokes said due to the extensive 2013 consultation there would not be a new white paper process.
He expected a draft bill would be out for public consultation in the second half of this year.
